Oil cooled VS. Oil & Water Cooled - Miata Turbo Forum - Boost cars, acquire cats.

Welcome to Miataturbo.net   Members
 


DIY Turbo Discussion greddy on a 1.8? homebrew kit?

Reply
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 06-29-2008, 01:26 AM   #1
!!! NOT CONFIRMED !!!
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Auburn, CA
Posts: 18
Total Cats: 0
Default Oil cooled VS. Oil & Water Cooled

I was hoping you guys could post you experiences with having an oil cooled turbo vs having both. If you weren't water cooled did you have an Oil cooler? Did you have any oil temp problems? If you were water cooled did you have any overheating problems? Anyone actually noticed a difference when adding an oil cooler or adding the water lines? How about when the car was tracked/driven hard? I'm running an oil cooler for sure, but I'm trying to decide if I want to try and get away without watercooling it. Then again the more heat you can pull out of that turbo the better. I also really like how much cleaner the engine bay looks without them. They always seem to leak and cause overheating problems anyways.

On a side note. How many of you are running accusump / oil accumulators?
David_LB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2008, 01:46 AM   #2
Elite Member
iTrader: (12)
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Hermosa Beach, CA
Posts: 2,575
Total Cats: 11
Default

I have a oil only turbo, stock oil system. Driving very hard on hot days, or idleing long, I see 220 degrees F max. Usually when fully warmed up, im around 200 degrees. (oil temp)

Im sure the track would be a much different story.

Last edited by cardriverx; 06-29-2008 at 03:16 AM.
cardriverx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2008, 02:46 AM   #3
Elite Member
iTrader: (13)
 
cjernigan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 8,147
Total Cats: 6
Default

I run oil cooled only, but only because I don't hook up the coolant to the turbo. You don't have to have water cooling, it won't make things much cooler, its more for DD cars that get turned on and off constantly.

FWIW, I don't know a single person on this board running the accusump or an oil accumulator. I saw one accumulator sold here but that was it.

If it's a substantial difference in cost for water cooling don't bother.
cjernigan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2008, 08:59 AM   #4
Elite Member
iTrader: (21)
 
paul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Point Pleasant, NJ
Posts: 2,957
Total Cats: 2
Default

Hmm, I was under the impression that it was a bad idea to run an oil & water cooled turbo with only the oil hooked up. Isn't the oil flow restricted more on an oil&water cooled turbo because the water does a lot of the cooling?

When my BEGi kit came it included the wrong fittings for the coolant lines so I ran the car with oil only for a few days. I tried my best not to beat on it at the advice of Tim, but you know how that goes. I don't have an oil temp gauge so I can't say if those temps changed but I swear it seemed like that turbo heated up like a mother ****** immediately before the coolant lines were connected. I did too many changes at once (added water lines, intercooler) to know for sure if it affected my air temps.
paul is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2008, 12:05 PM   #5
Elite Member
iTrader: (13)
 
cjernigan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 8,147
Total Cats: 6
Default

The turbo that came on my car was run without coolant hooked up for like 3 years I think.
If you can get fittings easily, running coolant has it's benefits i'm sure. I just never did it on the old setup.
cjernigan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2008, 04:51 PM   #6
Murderator
iTrader: (76)
 
18psi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 36,192
Total Cats: 2,583
Default

IMHO If it wont cost an arm and leg and not too hard to hook up, I would DEFINITELY run water and oil cooling on a turbo. The cooling efficiency might not be astronomically better, but it IS better for sure. That and the benefit of car being able to cool the turbo faster after a spirited drive, alowing you to turn it off faster. just my .02
18psi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2008, 06:19 PM   #7
I'm Miserable!
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 858
Total Cats: 0
Default

i've had 5 NA-T cars, never used the water lines, all daily driven - never had a coking problem
SloS13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2008, 06:42 PM   #8
Murderator
iTrader: (76)
 
18psi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 36,192
Total Cats: 2,583
Default

noone said there would be a problem, just that its better to use it if its not too much trouble to hook it up.
18psi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2008, 07:21 PM   #9
!!! NOT CONFIRMED !!!
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Auburn, CA
Posts: 18
Total Cats: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 18psi View Post
IMHO If it wont cost an arm and leg and not too hard to hook up, I would DEFINITELY run water and oil cooling on a turbo. The cooling efficiency might not be astronomically better, but it IS better for sure. That and the benefit of car being able to cool the turbo faster after a spirited drive, alowing you to turn it off faster. just my .02
Has anyone ever had overheating issues after adding them and not upgrading the radiator? What about the cars with the big intercoolers? Anyone running gutted thermostats?
David_LB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2008, 07:32 PM   #10
Tour de Franzia
iTrader: (6)
 
hustler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Republic of Dallas
Posts: 29,114
Total Cats: 351
Default

every road track car I've seen with a turbo has watercooling, as far back as the old turbo toyota turbo LM car. I don't see how its a bad idea.


Tons of people have overheating issues regardless of turbo cooling method.
hustler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2008, 06:59 AM   #11
Junior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Bristol
Posts: 442
Total Cats: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David_LB View Post
Has anyone ever had overheating issues after adding them and not upgrading the radiator?
The heat has to go somewhere, if water cooled then it leaves by the radiator, if oil cooled then into the engine which is cooled by the radiator.

If the car is going to overheat it will do it with or without running the waterlines. Unless of course you use an oil cooler
Duckie_uk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2008, 09:29 AM   #12
Elite Member
iTrader: (9)
 
TurboTim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chesterfield, NJ
Posts: 6,485
Total Cats: 248
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by paul View Post
Hmm, I was under the impression that it was a bad idea to run an oil & water cooled turbo with only the oil hooked up. Isn't the oil flow restricted more on an oil&water cooled turbo because the water does a lot of the cooling?

When my BEGi kit came it included the wrong fittings for the coolant lines so I ran the car with oil only for a few days. I tried my best not to beat on it at the advice of Tim, but you know how that goes. I don't have an oil temp gauge so I can't say if those temps changed but I swear it seemed like that turbo heated up like a mother ****** immediately before the coolant lines were connected. I did too many changes at once (added water lines, intercooler) to know for sure if it affected my air temps.
Garrett ball bearing turbos should be run with a .035" oil restrictor. It would be dumb to not run the coolant lines.
TurboTim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2008, 11:42 AM   #13
Junior Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: So Cal
Posts: 331
Total Cats: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cjernigan View Post
its more for DD cars that get turned on and off constantly.
I DD mine, and without the water cooling (went a couple of days because the hose burnt and never had the time to fix it) it would get way hotter. I saw drastic changes not only in startup up, but in temperature variances on my SCII.

I never understood people who ran non-water cooled on turbos that accept it. Hell not only is it so easy to convert a miata to utilize the water lines, but it is so cheap too (if you go with just two nipples, hose clamps, and 5/16 "IIRC" lines.)
99NBMia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2008, 11:49 AM   #14
I'm Miserable!
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 858
Total Cats: 0
Default

I don't water-cool mine because less parts = less parts that might fail.

If I had an expensive BB turbo, I would water-cool it just in case. But like I said, I've probably put 200k+ miles on NA-T cars and never had a problem - so, if it ain't broke don't fix it.
SloS13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2008, 11:38 AM   #15
Senior Member
iTrader: (6)
 
nester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 812
Total Cats: 0
Default

I didn't water cool my 16g.
nester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2008, 11:54 AM   #16
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Newbsauce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: NoVA
Posts: 2,304
Total Cats: 2
Default

I ran the 2871 w/o water lines for awhile... didn't really have issues....went to water cooling when my coolant system was all setup. I did it, but I wouldnt recommend it, especially for track days.
Newbsauce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2008, 01:15 PM   #17
Elite Member
iTrader: (22)
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Sunny Spanish speaking Non US Caribbean
Posts: 3,257
Total Cats: 3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Newbsauce View Post
I ran the 2871 w/o water lines for awhile... didn't really have issues....went to water cooling when my coolant system was all setup. I did it, but I wouldnt recommend it, especially for track days.
Sorry I don't understand. You wouldn't recommend running it without the water lines; is that what you're saying? If so, what differences did you notice when you put in the water lines?

Thanks
Rafa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2008, 01:35 PM   #18
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,889
Total Cats: 1,792
Default

Quote:
I did it, but I wouldnt recommend it, especially for track days.
referring back to his previous statement of running without water lines....
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2008, 04:38 PM   #19
I'm Miserable!
iTrader: (5)
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: SLC, Utah
Posts: 1,591
Total Cats: 0
Default

fwiw, srt4's only have oil lines from the factory and they produce more power in stock form than 80% of the cars on here.
zoom2zoom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2008, 04:43 PM   #20
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Newbsauce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: NoVA
Posts: 2,304
Total Cats: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zoom2zoom View Post
fwiw, srt4's only have oil lines from the factory and they produce more power in stock form than 80% of the cars on here.
That really means nothing. ****, they also weld their turbo to the manifold. Since they make more power then 80% of the cars on here I better get welding.
Newbsauce is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
OTS Bilstein to motorsports ASN conversion stoves Suspension, Brakes, Drivetrain 5 04-21-2016 04:00 PM
Expected intake temps on the track? tazswing Race Prep 20 10-03-2015 12:04 PM
Moroso Air Oil Separator Catch Can Aroundcorner Miata parts for sale/trade 2 10-01-2015 04:20 PM


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:55 PM.